search for: getindexedtype

...o pass in? vector or > smallvector? If so, a pointer to the first element + extents is fine. I was passing a std::vector in. And you are quite right, first element + size works like a charm. Since I am using a vector of uint64_t's instead of Value*, I did need to add an extra version of getIndexedType(), taking a uint64_t* instead of Value**. > My basic objection is that I don't like tons of code in header files. > It obfuscates the header and slows down compile times (of llvm itself) Ah, that is even a better reason :-) I did use a template function to prevent duplicating code,...

...f uint64_t's or something like that? > because I want to be able to pass in iterators. I could define a > version that > takes std<uint64_t>::iterators, but next thing we know, we also need > them for > lists, SmallVectors, etc. That's why one of the original > getIndexedType > methods is a template, and that's why I think it makes sense to make > another > one a template. What flavor of iterators do you want to pass in? vector or smallvector? If so, a pointer to the first element + extents is fine. > Any particular objections to this? Is the cod...

Hi all, currently, GetElementPtrInst has a method getIndexedType, which has a templated variant. You pass in a begin and an end iterator, and it will find the indexed type for those. However, both iterators must iterate over Value*. For some argpromotion code, I would like to pass in iterators that iterate over unsigneds instead of Value*. I currently solve thi...

...he main topic of this post. Gr. Matthijs Index: lib/VMCore/Instructions.cpp =================================================================== --- lib/VMCore/Instructions.cpp (revision 53672) +++ lib/VMCore/Instructions.cpp (working copy) @@ -1068,41 +1068,6 @@ init(Ptr, Idx, Name); } -// getIndexedType - Returns the type of the element that would be loaded with -// a load instruction with the specified parameters. -// -// A null type is returned if the indices are invalid for the specified -// pointer type. -// -const Type* GetElementPtrInst::getIndexedType(const Type *Ptr, -...

...nst::init(llvm::Value*, llvm::Value* const*, unsigned int, llvm::Twine const&)' C:/Utilities/MSYS/build/llvm/Debug+Asserts/lib/libLLVMAnalysis.a(ScalarEvolutionExpander.o):C:/Programming/VersionControl/llvm/include/llvm/Instructions.h:330: undefined reference to `llvm::GetElementPtrInst::getIndexedType(llvm::Type*, llvm::Value* const*, unsigned int)' C:/Utilities/MSYS/build/llvm/Debug+Asserts/lib/libLLVMAnalysis.a(ScalarEvolutionExpander.o):C:/Programming/VersionControl/llvm/include/llvm/Instructions.h:332: undefined reference to `llvm::GetElementPtrInst::getIndexedType(llvm::Type*, llvm::...

...> version that takes an array of uint64_t's or something like that? because I want to be able to pass in iterators. I could define a version that takes std<uint64_t>::iterators, but next thing we know, we also need them for lists, SmallVectors, etc. That's why one of the original getIndexedType methods is a template, and that's why I think it makes sense to make another one a template. Any particular objections to this? Is the code size increase a problem? AFAICS, in cases where you need this method, it will be a tradeoff between speed (having to iterate all your indices and create a...

On Jul 16, 2008, at 9:58 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote: > Hi all, > > once more with the patch inline for easy review. I did not include the > argpromotion pass here, since it's not the main topic of this post. Hi Matthijs, I'd prefer to not turn this into a template. Why not just define a version that takes an array of uint64_t's or something like that? -Chris

...;getType())) + if (!isa<StructType>(Val->getType()) && !isa<ArrayType>(Val- >getType()) && + !isa<UnionType>(Val->getType())) return Error(ID.Loc, "extractvalue operand must be array or struct"); if (!ExtractValueInst::getIndexedType(Val->getType(), Indices.begin(), Indices.end())) @@ -2156,7 +2195,8 @@ ParseIndexList(Indices) || ParseToken(lltok::rparen, "expected ')' in insertvalue constantexpr")) return true; - if (!isa<Str...

...architecture x86_64: "llvm::ConstantExpr::getGetElementPtr(llvm::Constant*, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>, bool)", referenced from: llvm::ConstantExpr::getInBoundsGetElementPtr(llvm::Constant*, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>)in ccFB7xjg.o "llvm::GetElementPtrInst::getIndexedType(llvm::Type*, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>)", referenced from: llvm::GetElementPtrInst::GetElementPtrInst(llvm::Value*, llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>, unsigned int, llvm::Twine const&, llvm::Instruction*)in ccFB7xjg.o "llvm::PointerType::get(llvm::Type*, unsigned int...

...; + if (!isa<StructType>(Val->getType()) && > !isa<ArrayType>(Val->getType()) && > + !isa<UnionType>(Val->getType())) > return Error(ID.Loc, "extractvalue operand must be array or struct"); > if (!ExtractValueInst::getIndexedType(Val->getType(), Indices.begin(), > Indices.end())) > @@ -2156,7 +2195,8 @@ > ParseIndexList(Indices) || > ParseToken(lltok::rparen, "expected ')' in insertvalue > constantexpr")) > return true; &g...

...; "llvm::ConstantExpr::getGetElementPtr(llvm::Constant*, > llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>, bool)", referenced from: > llvm::ConstantExpr::getInBoundsGetElementPtr(llvm::Constant*, > llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>)in ccFB7xjg.o > "llvm::GetElementPtrInst::getIndexedType(llvm::Type*, > llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>)", referenced from: > llvm::GetElementPtrInst::GetElementPtrInst(llvm::Value*, > llvm::ArrayRef<llvm::Value*>, unsigned int, llvm::Twine const&, > llvm::Instruction*)in ccFB7xjg.o > "llvm::PointerType::get(...

...; + if (!isa<StructType>(Val->getType()) && > !isa<ArrayType>(Val->getType()) && > + !isa<UnionType>(Val->getType())) > return Error(ID.Loc, "extractvalue operand must be array or struct"); > if (!ExtractValueInst::getIndexedType(Val->getType(), Indices.begin(), > Indices.end())) > @@ -2156,7 +2195,8 @@ > ParseIndexList(Indices) || > ParseToken(lltok::rparen, "expected ')' in insertvalue > constantexpr")) > return true; &g...

OK here's the patch for real this time :) On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 4:36 PM, Talin <viridia at gmail.com> wrote: > Here's a work in progress of the union patch. Note that the test "union.ll" > does not work, so you probably don't want to check this in as is. However, > I'd be interested in any feedback you're willing to give. > > -- > -- Talin

Here's a work in progress of the union patch. Note that the test "union.ll" does not work, so you probably don't want to check this in as is. However, I'd be interested in any feedback you're willing to give. -- -- Talin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

I used &Idx[0]. In future, please avoid tabs in your patch. I applied your patch. http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20071217/056403.html - Devang On Dec 17, 2007, at 2:57 AM, Richard Pennington wrote: > Devang Patel wrote: >> On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote: >>> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and

Devang Patel wrote: > On Dec 15, 2007, at 12:15 PM, Richard Pennington wrote: > >> I got the current version of LLVM via svn yesterday and modified my >> code to >> use the LLVMFoldingBuilder. Very nice! >> >> My question is this: I noticed that the folding builder doesn't fold >> some >> operations, e.g. casts. Is there some reason why? If

...Type>(Val->getType()) && >> !isa<ArrayType>(Val->getType()) && >> + !isa<UnionType>(Val->getType())) >> return Error(ID.Loc, "extractvalue operand must be array or >> struct"); >> if (!ExtractValueInst::getIndexedType(Val->getType(), Indices.begin(), >> Indices.end())) >> @@ -2156,7 +2195,8 @@ >> ParseIndexList(Indices) || >> ParseToken(lltok::rparen, "expected ')' in insertvalue >> constantexpr")) >&g...

...call to: Value *x_idx = builder.CreateConstGEP2_32(cB, 0, 0); However I got the same assert. It looks like this line in Instruction.h from LLVM is producing the assert further down the stack: 815 Type *PtrTy = PointerType::get(checkGEPType( 816 getIndexedType(Ptr->getType(), IdxList)), 817 Ptr->getType()->getPointerAddressSpace()); Resulting in the debugger producing: (gdb) p PtrTy $19 = (llvm::Type *) 0x7fffffff63d0 (gdb) p PtrTy->dump() <unrecognized-type> $20 = void Is there...

..._idx = builder.CreateConstGEP2_32(cB, 0, 0); > > However I got the same assert. It looks like this line in Instruction.h from LLVM is producing the assert further down the stack: > > 815 Type *PtrTy = PointerType::get(checkGEPType( > 816 getIndexedType(Ptr->getType(), IdxList)), > 817 Ptr->getType()->getPointerAddressSpace()); > > Resulting in the debugger producing: > > (gdb) p PtrTy > $19 = (llvm::Type *) 0x7fffffff63d0 > (gdb) p PtrTy->dump() > <unrec...

...tGEP2_32(cB, 0, 0); > > > > However I got the same assert. It looks like this line in Instruction.h from LLVM is producing the assert further down the stack: > > > > 815 Type *PtrTy = PointerType::get(checkGEPType( > > 816 getIndexedType(Ptr->getType(), IdxList)), > > 817 Ptr->getType()->getPointerAddressSpace()); > > > > Resulting in the debugger producing: > > > > (gdb) p PtrTy > > $19 = (llvm::Type *) 0x7fffffff63d0 > > (gdb) p...